Sex Offender Gets 6 To 20 Years In Prison

An Allentown man who was convicted of a 1986 sexual assault continued to maintain his innocence this week as he was sentenced to six to 20 years in prison.

Reading from a prepared statement, Luis A. Acosta Jr. said the victim was having a romantic relationship with him and he didn't commit any forced sexual acts.

Acosta apologized for his previous outburst in court after the verdict was read in his Lehigh County trial. He was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse and indecent assault.

When the judge tried to read him his appeal rights after the verdict 2-1/2 years ago, Acosta exploded in anger and engaged in a skirmish with sheriff's deputies and the police prosecutor. Acosta was subdued and taken to the county prison.

During the outburst, Acosta threatened the 30-year-old victim, who had testified that he tried to rape her and succeeded in sexually assaulting her in her apartment.

At a sentencing hearing this week, Judge Maxwell E. Davison told Acosta that his behavior in the courtroom demonstrated his potential for violence and aggressive acts.

Davison lauded the progress Acosta has made in the county prison and his participation in Bible studies, drug and alcohol counseling and community college courses.

However, he said the harm to the victim required a state prison sentence.

Acosta had sought a new trial on several grounds, among them that the verdict was inconsistent and that his former attorney was ineffective for not rejecting a nun from the jury panel.

Acosta's court-appointed attorney, Michele Varricchio, argued that the verdict was inconsistent because Acosta was acquitted of rape but convicted of the two other charges.

Acosta claimed that jurors found him not guilty of rape because they believed his testimony that the woman consented to the acts.

Assistant District Attorney Kelly Waldron said the verdict was consistent with the victim's testimony. The woman described acts that did not fit the definition of rape, but also said the defendant forced her to perform acts that constituted indecent assault and involuntary deviate sexual intercourse.

The woman testified that she previously had consensual sex with Acosta, but told him she didn't want a serious romantic relationship. Acosta claimed the woman wanted to continue the relationship, but he told her he couldn't because he was living with another woman.

The judges dismissed Acosta's argument that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, saying it was up to the jury to determine credibility.

The woman didn't report the assault immediately.

When Acosta fell asleep in her bedroom, she went to her child's bedroom and slept. She said she didn't call police then because she feared for her child's safety.

When Acosta left the next morning, the woman went to Allentown police headquarters and reported that Acosta had stolen clothing from her.

The woman said she was reluctant to tell police about the assault.

After talking with a relative, she reported the assault later that day. In his post-trial motions, Acosta contended that his former attorney, James Heidecker, was ineffective for choosing a nun to serve on the jury.

At a hearing after the trial, Heidecker testified that he asked Acosta to allow him to strike the nun from the jury. But Acosta, he said, insisted on picking the nun because he was Catholic and thought that having a juror of his faith on the panel would benefit him.

Acosta alleged that after the trial, he learned that the nun's presence had an impact on the jury during deliberations.

The judges said they found Heidecker's testimony more credible than Acosta's and dismissed the claim that the attorney was ineffective.